Final motions: Judge allows graphic photos in Huguely trial

In anticipation of the largest murder trial Charlottesville has seen, a final hearing was held on Friday, with attorneys for accused girlfriend-killer George Huguely unsuccessful in keeping what they called "prejudicial" photos of slain UVA student Yeardley Love from being admitted as evidence. They were, however, able to prevent news photographers from getting perp-walk photos of Huguely as he moves in and out of the courthouse, at least while the jury is being chosen.

The trial of Huguely for the 2009 death of Love just weeks before the two were to graduate from UVA began Monday, February 6, with jury selection is expected to last two days.

In the February 3 hearing, defense attorney Fran Lawrence asked Judge Edward Hogshire to keep approximately 10 photos of Love from being admitted.

He objected to photographs that Commonwealth's Attorney Dave Chapmen said were supposed to tell the story of her missing computer, which police say Huguely admitted taking. Photos that showed her empty computer case and followed Internet cables around the room also showed her body on the floor where she'd been moved by fellow students to perform CPR.

"Her foot doesn't need to be in there," Lawrence said of one photo.

"You don't alter the photographs," countered Chapman.

Lawrence also complained about a series of pictures that showed the injuries on Love's face, and included her chest. "Why do you need to show the body from the shoulders down?" asked the judge.

Lawrence objected to autopsy photos of Love, including some with views of her brain, but Chapman insisted the photos were necessary to show her injuries. "They're an accurate picture of what was found," said the prosecutor, and Judge Hogshire ruled that all could be entered.

A fence has been put up in the rear of Charlottesville Circuit Court where prisoners are usually delivered to the courthouse, and NBC29's news director, David Foky, asked the judge to consider allowing a pool photographer and videographer.

"Our concern is that the photography barrier that's been set up is unprecedented and prevents us from getting the defendant coming to the case," said Foky.

Reminding the judge that the jury was not being sequestered and that the public doesn't have a right to see Huguely arrive at court, defense attorney Rhonda Quagliana objected. "That kind of photo has an effect," she said."It's very prejudicial. There's no right to it."

The judge agreed,

Meanwhile, the University of Virginia offered support to its students during the upcoming trial. In an email from Pat Lampkin, vice president of student affairs, students were directed to resources should they become emotionally distressed during the trial, get approached by media, or feel concerned about the safety of a friend or acquaintance.

On February 2, UVA law professor Anne Coughlin led a discussion to let students know about the differences between first-degree murder, second-degree murder and manslaughter.

29 comments

Sabbath Lily February 4th, 2012 | 8:41am

Per the article above:
"A fence has been put up in the rear of Charlottesville Circuit Court where prisoners are usually delivered to the courthouse, and NBC29's news director, David Foky, asked the judge to consider allowing a pool photographer and videographer."

"Reminding the judge that the jury was not being sequestered and that the public doesn't have a right to see Huguely arrive at court, Defense attorney Rhonda Quagliana objected. "That kind of photo has an effect," she said."It's very prejudicial. There's no right to it."

-------------

Let's be honest about this. If the defendant was African-American and poor, the judge would have had no problem with him being filmed arriving at court.

meanwhile.... February 4th, 2012 | 9:01am

The defense wants to bar pictures of the victim? Why not bar all evidence of the crime on the grounds that it may be "prejudicial"?

Let's be honest, Sabbath Lily, there is no rational way to respond to your conjecture as it is completely hypothetical and based on nothing but the thoughts in your head. Was there an African-American defendant in this town that generated so much media publicity? Did that defendant have an attorney that argued that such pictures should be inadmissible?

Why you wish to take this awful person, Huguely, and compare him to African-Americans is beyond me.

local 42 February 4th, 2012 | 10:17am

i agree. the whole story is bad enough without you (sabbath lily) turning it into a murder/race issue. cannot you be satisfied with the fact that it is bad? folks like you keep racism alive.

Black Resident February 4th, 2012 | 10:33am

Biggest charlottesville murder ever? How about in 08 when 2 people get shot and 1 gets killed at u heights gets basically no publicity by a a white girl gets killed at uva and the whole community is an an outrage..

local 42 February 4th, 2012 | 10:41am

again with the racism....wow, black resident, really?

Jeremy February 4th, 2012 | 10:55am

The pictures of the corpse are prejudicial and have a huge impact on the case. Everyone knows she was killed, so showing autopsy photos are only intended to inflame and outrage the jury. They are not necessary to present the prosecutors case effectively, it is a calculated move by the prosecutor. I think this case was much bigger than the U-Heights not because of the race of the assailant and victim, but because of the circumstances, two athletes, both on the eve of graduation and the domestic violence aspect of it grabbed national attention, not just local.

Reader February 4th, 2012 | 12:04pm

If George is going to say he didn't really hit her "that hard" then you need the autopsy photos to prove how hard he hit her. This is very important evidence. The victim is not here to speak for herself. It is up to her attorneys to make sure every detail that can tell her story is available to the jury. It is the job of the jury to not become "inflamed and outraged" by the facts. The judge will instruct them about that I'm sure.

Gasbag Self Ordained Expert February 4th, 2012 | 12:16pm

Having worked in this courtroom for decades, and other courtrooms as well, I agree 100% with Sabbath Lilly in one respect. High dollar justice affords a lot of special privileges to a defendant. A young indigent individual, white or black, doesn't stand a chance in the criminal justice system. The indigent are chewed up and spit out by the system.

And this case is far from being the most infamous murder case ever heard in Charlottesville. IMHO, the barrier blocking view of the defendant is a slap in the face to the media. Not only the local media, but now the national media as well. The jury is intelligent enough to know the defendant is in custody and will be transported to and from court in leg irons and handcuffs by a deputy sheriff. The barrier is not really hiding these well known facts from any jury member.

B February 4th, 2012 | 1:59pm

Jeremy --

This is only big news because the accused and the victim were both wealthy, and we are not supposed to think that the wealthy can be murderers while also being shocked by a wealthy person being a murder victim. Had they been working class people, this would have been mentioned once or twice in the local news and never made it to the national spotlight. Only poor people are supposed to commit murder, and it is not so big a deal if one poor person kills another poor person. Poor people kill each other all the time, and rich people are above that sort of thing, right?

-- B

Carrboro Pete February 4th, 2012 | 5:46pm

"everybody knows shw was killed"

That's true, but the Prosecutor still has to prove it in court. There's no provision in the law for things that "everybody knows". Hence the photographs.

job February 4th, 2012 | 6:15pm

Lots of racism here in southern VA. Lily has a point.

Cville Native February 4th, 2012 | 7:05pm

Sabbath Lily and many others have a point, there is a whole lot of racism not just in VA but everywhere. Bigotry too vs. homosexuals, women, children, etc.

As for "high profile" cases who have high dollar attorneys, yes, he will get special treatment and already has thus far. Though I hate to burst anyone's bubble - the sickest part about this whole thing - he will walk.

Gasbag is right - indigent or those who do not get attorneys worth a damn to represent them get chewed up and thrown in jail, they throw away the key. Those that can pay for representation or some bleeding heart attorney takes the case, serve less time and are convicted on less. The truth of our American "justice" system.

Zip February 4th, 2012 | 7:17pm

What if they have a video of the victim falling down in the bar or on her way home? That might get him off.

Black Resident February 5th, 2012 | 12:32am

No black murder in this city has been covered by this paper. I remember the day a dear friend of my got murdered the front page of this news paper had a uva graduate on it.

HollowBoy February 5th, 2012 | 11:03am

Several points. Race: If both had been UVa athletes and had been African-American, this would still have been a well-publicized trial.
Its true about money. Thats what counts more than race. Think if OJ Simpson had been a guy from an LA housing project that he would have had all the highpowered defense that got him acquitted?
As for graphic photos- the jury in the Barry Bowles murder trial were shown graphic color photos of his wife's 16 stab wounds. Why shouldn't the jury see Yeardley Love's injuries?
The defense is willing to try any argument, any maneuver, to get their well-heeled client off with minimal punishment. It is sickening.
Its too bad they didn't ask for capital murder. Why is his brutal, senseless crime less horrible than that of Steve Roach of Greene County, who shot and killed his elderly next door neighbor(who had been kind to him) and took her pension money? He was executed.He was white, btw. Why should George Huguely not face the same justice?

Cville Native February 5th, 2012 | 11:20am

So agreed here HollowBoy: "Its too bad they didn't ask for capital murder. Why is his brutal, senseless crime less horrible than that of Steve Roach of Greene County, who shot and killed his elderly next door neighbor(who had been kind to him) and took her pension money? He was executed.He was white, btw. Why should George Huguely not face the same justice?"

Unfortunately, Huguely is a UVA Student, from $, has $ backing him and he will receive either a slap on the wrist with minimal time - and remember all this time he has stayed in the "Hilton on Avon Street" counts towards any sentence handed down - or he will walk on some legal issue. And based upon our investigators around here at ALL of the departments and how diligent they are - not far fetched. After all, this is a murder of a woman and we know how woman rate in this area ...

so tru February 5th, 2012 | 3:22pm

Very scary that he might get off. The photos IMO are critical to show the extent of the assault so he and his attorney can't minimize the crime. I don't get the ban on the perp walk pix.

boooo! February 5th, 2012 | 4:08pm

I doubt this guy will get off. There's just no way. He admitted to kicking in her door and beating her up, bashing her head repeatedly into the wall and leaving her in a pool of blood. It doesn't matter what, if any, meds or substances she may have been on, or whatever it is his lawyers are going to try to argue. And as far as the idea of a non-premeditated crime of passion, or him being under the influence, etc. - the guy had the presence of mind to steal her computer afterwards, trying to remove any incriminating evidence showing what had been going on between them leading up to him snapping. Another fact that's not disputed by his side. So if he had the presence of mind to remove evidence, and was more concerned about computer evidence then his dead ex girlfriend laying in a pool of blood, then that says it all right there about what's going on with him.

There's just no way this guy is getting off. The jury isn't going to care that he's a "lacrosse player." The jury doesn't care what kind of money he has. The facts - of which his side isn't denying - and the photos speak for themselves. So much so that I don't even fathom why his side is even bothering trying to fight this. It's a losing battle and a total waste of money. He should have just entered a guilty plea and taken responsibility for what he did. Oh wait, to take responsibility would mean him and his bloodsucking lawyers and the family that created him actually have souls. bwahahahaha. My bad.

SkipD February 5th, 2012 | 6:56pm

Please remember who the victim is in this case............

meanwhile.... February 5th, 2012 | 8:03pm

Keep in mind we're talking Charlottesville prosecutors and a Charlottesville jury. It's amateur hour in this case and the deer in the headlights effect should not be underestimated.

Do not be surprised to see George Huguely walking the streets of Charlottesville before his 40th birthday.

boooo! February 5th, 2012 | 8:22pm

Skip D -

A little tired of you following me around from thread to thread repeating the same verbatim script.
"Please remember who the victim is in this case............" You've posted this immediately following things I've written now more than once. Lot of people saying worse things then I've ever said. You need to find another person to stalk in the comments section.

Michael Sutton February 5th, 2012 | 11:01pm

I am not sure about "amateur hour".

And I will be absent from comments during the trial, I am sure this not a great disappointment to the readers.

I trust from my past experiences with trials and The Hook staff that you will see fine reporting and from a source that can be trusted.

We all wish that this did not happen, but The Hook will be "THE" source that will get it right.

Jeremy February 6th, 2012 | 11:10am

The Defense is going with a very specific medical expert dependent strategy. They can't deny the assault, the Defendant has already admitted that. The Defense strategy will be that the defendant's actions while criminal would not ordinarily have led to death but for the prescription pills that the victim was taking. The Prosecutors expert will say she died as a result of blunt force trauma. He will be convicted of something the question will be how long he will serve in prison. One other point, I think this is big news as much for the domestic violence aspect as any other, and the fact that they were athletes at a prominent nationally respected University also plays a big role.

B February 6th, 2012 | 1:58pm

Jeremy --

What does their being athletes have to do with anything? We are dealing with an accused murderer who has a history of alcohol-fueled violence and run-ins with the police. Who cares about the fact that he played lacrosse, except that his status as a lacrosse player might have played a role in his not being kicked out of school for his previous arrests?

-- B

Jeremy February 6th, 2012 | 3:11pm

B because both teams were nationally ranked at the time of the assault, that is why people paid more attention to it. The point being if they had been ordinary students, it would have gotten less attention.

Jeremy February 6th, 2012 | 3:21pm

B people love sports and athletes, ever heard of the "Super Bowl"?

red February 6th, 2012 | 5:03pm

UVA has kicked tons of athletes out over the years for getting in trouble with the law, many much "better" than a back up, out of shape lacrosse player. He did not report his prior arrest to the school and the jurisidction did not report it either. Athletes are on thinner ice than non-athletes as they are often on a scholarship and are viewed as representatives. Non-athletes who are arrested for not over the top crimes will never suffer consequences from a university.

SkipD February 8th, 2012 | 7:30am

boooo! Never looked at it as though I was "following" you..................I guess you are looking over your shoulder? Well........BOOOOOOOOOO!